There are massive uncertainties in all this, and I do not want to pile the gloom on the Treasury Bench. All I will say is that there are great risks. I do understand that the Government have an important point on this, but if that is the case, the proper dialogue that should be taking place between those on the Treasury Bench and the House is how we craft and alter this legislation both to emphasise the statutory process to be followed and to make sure that the only circumstances in which it is not followed—clause 9 has to be used as an example—is where it would be impossible to get an article 50 extension to enable the statutory process to take place before we go. If we do that, we will start talking sense in this House, rather than the polemical nonsense that we have been talking over the past few days.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 14 November 2017.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union (Withdrawal) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
631 c236 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2020-04-14 15:10:10 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-11-14/17111465000087
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-11-14/17111465000087
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-11-14/17111465000087